Session 4 - Best available techniques for the mining sector
Download as PPTX, PDF0 likes560 views
The document discusses Best Available Techniques (BAT) for the mining sector, including various recommendations and frameworks established by OECD and EU directives. It highlights the management of extractive waste, the application of BAT for mining facilities, and the challenges faced by member states in implementing these regulations effectively. Key limitations include the absence of legally binding emission levels and the lack of clear definitions, which complicate enforcement and risk assessment.
Session 4 - Best available techniques for the mining sector
- 1. BEST AVAILABLE TECHNIQUES (BAT) FOR THE MINING SECTOR Marit Hjort, Policy Analyst (marit.hjort@oecd.org) 19 April 2019 Workshop on Mining and Green growth in the EECCA region
- 2. Steps in determining BAT and emission limit values
- 3. Policies on BAT or Similar Concepts Across the World (2017) Approaches to Establishing BAT Around the World (2018) Methodologies and Data for Effectiveness Evaluation of BAT Policies (2019, forthcoming) Guidance document on how to determine BAT and associated emission levels (forthcoming) Study on the value chain aspects of BAT determination (forthcoming) Cross-country comparisons of BAT for selected sectors (forthcoming) Deliverables of the OECD’s BAT project, 2016-2022 All reports available free of charge: oe.cd/bat
- 4. • EU – BREF on the Management of Waste from Extractive Industries (2009; 2018) • Russian Federation – BREF on mining and processing of ferrous metals ores (2017) – BREF on mining and processing of nonferrous metals ores (2017) – BREF on mining industry, general processes and methods (2016) – BREF on precious metals mining (2017) • People’s Republic of China – Guidelines on Available Pollution Prevention and Control Techniques for the mining and mineral processing of the iron and steel industry (2010) • India – Comprehensive Industry Document on iron ore mining (2007) BAT for the mining sector
- 5. • Adopted under the Directive on the Management of Waste from Extractive Industries (2006) • Draws on the Integrated Pollution Prevention and Control Directive and the Seveso II Directive (1996) • 1st BREF (2009); 2nd BREF and BAT Conclusions (2018) • Applies to facilities that generate extractive waste and have a permit or a waste management plan • Differentiated obligations: most stringent for Category A facilities EU BREF for the Management of Waste from Extractive Industries (‘the mining BREF’)
- 6. • Management of extractive waste from onshore extractive activities • Handling/transport of extractive waste (e.g. loading, unloading and on-site transport) • Treatment of extractive waste • Deposition of extractive waste • Activities directly associated with the management of extractive waste Activities and processes covered by the EU BAT Conclusions on mining
- 7. • Generic BAT – corporate management – information and data management – waste hierarchy • Risk-specific BAT – safety and stability – prevention/minimisation of water status deterioration and air and soil pollution – other environmental or human health risks • No BAT on sea tailings disposal • Emerging techniques Categorisation of BAT on mining (EU)
- 8. • Based on the IED “Seville Process” • BAT Conclusions not published as a Commission Implementing Decision, but as a JRC report • Resemble the BREFs developed under the IPPC Directive and not the IED, i.e. not legally binding • Performance objectives rather than BAT-AELs Comparison with BREFs developed under the Industrial Emissions Directive (IED)
- 9. • Requires preparation for closure from the onset • Broad range of facilities; differentiated obligations • Identifies performance objectives that allow flexibility for permitting authorities • Measures to implement the Directive adopted in most Member States improvement from first to second reporting period Strengths of the EU Directive and BREF on extractive waste management
- 10. • Lack of BAT on risk assessment/identification (most BAT concern risk treatment) • No legally binding BAT-associated emission levels; wide ranges for performance objectives hard to enforce • Lack of clear definitions of extractive waste • Category A facilities not identified by all MS (and permits and emergency plans missing) • Large variation regarding inspections across MS Limitations of the EU Directive and BREF on extractive waste management
- 11. For further information • Marit Hjort marit.hjort@oecd.org +33(0)1 45 24 74 01 • oe.cd/BAT
Editor's Notes
- #6: BREF: http://eippcb.jrc.ec.europa.eu/reference/BREF/jrc109657_mwei_bref_-_for_pubsy_online.pdf 17 000 – 18 000 facilities in the EU: industrial and construction minerals: 95% fossil fuels: 3% metalliferous ores: 2% (12): These measures should be based, inter alia, on the concept of best available techniques as defined in Directive 96/61/EC (IPPC Directive). Article 21(3): 3. The Commission shall organise an exchange of information between Member States and the organisations concerned on best available techniques, associated monitoring and developments in them. The Commission shall publish the results of the exchange of information. Industries involved in the BERF development: EUROMINES, EUROMETAUX, EURACOAL, IMA-EUROPE, UEPG The MWEI Bref applies to all extraction activities that generate extractive waste (Art 4(2)&(3) of the extractive waste directive 2006/21/EC). The first threshold to determine whether the Bref is relevant for a given installation is whether it generates extractive waste at all. There are many facilities that do not produce extractive waste, for example a quarry that extracts sand or gravel and has used top soil for landscaping may have no extractive waste. Another threshold is whether the area where extractive waste is accumulated is to be considered as an extractive waste facility (Art 3(15)). An extractive waste facility needs a permit otherwise an extractive waste management plan (Art 5) is sufficient. Although Art 5 does not specifically refer to BAT, the Bref is in principle relevant based on Art4 but is it fair to assume that the highest impact of the Bref are on permits of extractive waste facilities.
- #8: Information and data management: (including the site-specific information and the evaluation of environmental risks and impacts) Risk-specific BAT: corresponding to defined KEI - No impact assessment study carried out, e.g. based on E-PRTR data.
- #9: The MWEI Bref does not identify BAT AELs but specifies performance objectives (last paragraph of BAT 47 that directs the reader to table 4.55). No similar table existed in the 2009 BREF. The ranges are very wide. Dissenting views: - EUROMINES, EUROMETAUX, EURACOAL, IMA-EUROPE, UEPG and Austria disagree with the TWG proposal for the introductory text to Table 4.55, without providing a sound alternative, and suggest an alternative header for Table 4.55: "Selected examples of achieved and reported concentration ranges using BAT 45, BAT 46 and BAT 47, from a wide range of extractive waste management operations." In 2003, adding extractive waste management to the IPPC Directive was discussed as an option. This option was not retained and a standalone legislative instrument was the preferred option. The extractive waste directive includes elements of IPPC but also of Seveso II (the Directive on the control of major-accident hazards involving dangerous substances). The extractive waste directive does not include the necessary provisions to adopt BAT conclusions (Commission Implementing Decision under comitology procedure). In order to change this, the extractive waste directive would need to be amended by introducing the corresponding provisions of the industrial emissions directive. This depends largely on the question how green the next Commission will be.
- #10: No legally binding BAT – lagging behind IED Implementation report: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:52016DC0553&from=EN Regarding definition of extractive waste: some would try to place the waste the category of construction material rather than waste